Getting max absolutism up

[jez9999]

Many guides I've read say that you should really be aiming to get max absolutism up to 100 by the mid-to-late game. When the age of absolutism comes around, though, my max is usually more like zero because of all the estate decisions I've taken. Are you basically meant to just revoke all the estate decisions at that point? Although the loyalty equilibrium is a bit better at that point, I think it'll still be below 50% if I revoke everything, so:

a) what am I meant to do to get max absolutism to 100?
b) how do I do this whilst maintaining an estates loyalty equilibrium above 50%?

 

[fireandplague]

Switch out your government reforms for ones that give estate loyalty or more max absolutism. And then yes, get rid of almost all estate privileges except the ones that give +1 mana generation

 

[jez9999]

Should you be trying to get to 100 or is something like 50 or 70 still respectable?

 

[fireandplague]

Should you be trying to get to 100 or is something like 50 or 70 still respectable?

Depends on your goals, I usually get around 70 because I like some privileges too much. But if you're going for expansion/conquest it's best to have 100.

 

[Maxxie42]

Switch out your government reforms for ones that give estate loyalty or more max absolutism. And then yes, get rid of almost all estate privileges except the ones that give +1 mana generation

That's a hard disagree for me on that first part. Government reform progress is so precious and so hard to accrue that switching gov reforms is horribly inefficient.

What I do is pick the reforms that lower estate influence from the get go, rather than the ones that increase loyalty. And once 1610 hits, I try to already be above 70 crown land, or I bite the bullet and seize land and fight the rebels, but in any case I revoke most privileges. The point isn't to keep high loyalty, but to keep low influence.

Many great projects can also replace privileges when it comes to estate loyalty.

 

[Cuke]

That's a hard disagree for me on that first part. Government reform progress is so precious and so hard to accrue that switching gov reforms is horribly inefficient.

What I do is pick the reforms that lower estate influence from the get go, rather than the ones that increase loyalty. And once 1610 hits, I try to already be above 70 crown land, or I bite the bullet and seize land and fight the rebels, but in any case I revoke most privileges. The point isn't to keep high loyalty, but to keep low influence.

Many great projects can also replace privileges when it comes to estate loyalty.

However, absolutism takes time to accrue up to its limit. I reckon I used to get all reforms by 1700s, so I really wouldn't mind switching reforms around to get those extra +5s.

 

[fireandplague]

That's a hard disagree for me on that first part. Government reform progress is so precious and so hard to accrue that switching gov reforms is horribly inefficient.

What I do is pick the reforms that lower estate influence from the get go, rather than the ones that increase loyalty. And once 1610 hits, I try to already be above 70 crown land, or I bite the bullet and seize land and fight the rebels, but in any case I revoke most privileges. The point isn't to keep high loyalty, but to keep low influence.

Many great projects can also replace privileges when it comes to estate loyalty.

Eh, you should be pretty much done with all your government reforms by 1620 or whenever you're hitting your first absolutism cap. And it's a tough sell to put in the reform that gives +0.5 yearly absolutism and +5.00 max absolutism before absolutism is even a thing.

 

[Maxxie42]

Eh, you should be pretty much done with all your government reforms by 1620 or whenever you're hitting your first absolutism cap. And it's a tough sell to put in the reform that gives +0.5 yearly absolutism and +5.00 max absolutism before absolutism is even a thing.

With 0% average autonomy and no other modifiers, you gain 0.83 government reform progress a month.

In order to be done with government reforms by 1620, as a monarchy (republics and theocracies have more reforms), plus be able to switch some government reforms, you would need to gain, on average, 1.43 progress per month, over the entire 1444-1620 period.

If you have a reliable way to perform this feat, please share with the group...

 

[fireandplague]

With 0% average autonomy and no other modifiers, you gain 0.83 government reform progress a month.

In order to be done with government reforms by 1620, as a monarchy (republics and theocracies have more reforms), plus be able to switch some government reforms, you would need to gain, on average, 1.43 progress per month, over the entire 1444-1620 period.

If you have a reliable way to perform this feat, please share with the group...

Well you're right, maybe saying you "should be" at tier 10 in 1620 is a bit pushing it.

But it's definitely possible. My last non-modded non-custom nation game was on 1.34 as Hungary. I stopped my run in 1623, so I opened up the save game, and I'm at 207/420 progress towards tier 10 (the last reform). I have 2398 own development, 7438 subject development, and an average local autonomy of 35.7%. This autonomy was no doubt lower recently though, as my earlier direct conquests were stated.

 

[Maxxie42]

Well you're right, maybe saying you "should be" at tier 10 in 1620 is a bit pushing it.

But it's definitely possible. My last non-modded non-custom nation game was on 1.34 as Hungary. I stopped my run in 1623, so I opened up the save game, and I'm at 207/420 progress towards tier 10 (the last reform). I have 2398 own development, 7438 subject development, and an average local autonomy of 35.7%. This autonomy was no doubt lower recently though, as my earlier direct conquests were stated.

I think I see where the confusion comes from. You are referring to a 1.34 game, but now there are 11 tiers of reforms, not 10. And the last tier is arguably the most important one because it effectively gives 7% admin efficiency, so getting there as soon as possible outweighs (at least in my opinion) the cost of picking reforms that are not immediately optimal.

More generally, the thing about government reform progress is that it's the one resource that you can't trade other resources for, which is why I value it so highly. If you could spend money or mana to get more of it, it wouldn't be such a big deal.

 

[bokorthedust]

More generally, the thing about government reform progress is that it's the one resource that you can't trade other resources for, which is why I value it so highly. If you could spend money or mana to get more of it, it wouldn't be such a big deal.

I agree with your point, but there are a couple monuments scattered around which give reform progress growth when upgraded, so you do have some limited ability to trade money into it.

 

[Maxxie42]

I agree with your point, but there are a couple monuments scattered around which give reform progress growth when upgraded, so you do have some limited ability to trade money into it.

That's true, and I do heavily prioritize conquering the relevant provinces when I'm playing in Europe. But depending on where yous start, you may not have that option : in Europe there are four such monuments, but none in all of Asia, and only one in Africa, South and North America.

I think I'm especially aware of this right now because my current campaign has been Kham -> Tibet -> Khoshuud -> Lan Xang -> Siam, with government changes, lost reforms and super high autonomy due to destating most of my land, so now it's 1650 and I'm only on Tier 6...

 

[jez9999]

I think I see where the confusion comes from. You are referring to a 1.34 game, but now there are 11 tiers of reforms, not 10. And the last tier is arguably the most important one because it effectively gives 7% admin efficiency, so getting there as soon as possible outweighs (at least in my opinion) the cost of picking reforms that are not immediately optimal.

More generally, the thing about government reform progress is that it's the one resource that you can't trade other resources for, which is why I value it so highly. If you could spend money or mana to get more of it, it wouldn't be such a big deal.

Can you trade other resources for admin/diplo/military mana?

 

[Maxxie42]

Can you trade other resources for admin/diplo/military mana?

Yes, you can. Mainly, advisors are essentially a tool for turning money into mana. If you have manpower to spare, you can declare humiliate wars on your rivals and Show Strength for 300 mana. Estate privileges allow you to trade crown land and estate loyalty for mana as well. Finally, national focus allows you to convert two types of mana into the third.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I think I see where the confusion comes from. You are referring to a 1.34 game, but now there are 11 tiers of reforms, not 10. And the last tier is arguably the most important one because it effectively gives 7% admin efficiency, so getting there as soon as possible outweighs (at least in my opinion) the cost of picking reforms that are not immediately optimal.

More generally, the thing about government reform progress is that it's the one resource that you can't trade other resources for, which is why I value it so highly. If you could spend money or mana to get more of it, it wouldn't be such a big deal.

If you take reforms that keep estate influence low, you can make a case for only handing out mana privileges and being very sparing with any others. This causes you to gain crown land outright as you expand, which improves reform progress as well.

The opportunity cost for this is the benefits of some privileges + high influence from estates.

Once absolutism is available, it's hard to justify anything but getting it to max value ASAP.

If you have a reliable way to perform this feat, please share with the group...

Beginning the game as a republic then switching won't quite get you there, but combining that with low crown land will get you a lot closer.

IMO it can definitely be worth paying to switch government type to theocracy if your mid-late game goal is world conquest. -Score cost vs other religions isn't as good as admin efficiency, but it is nevertheless a very strong modifier. Combined with admin efficiency, you can take > 1000 dev per 100% war score, and that's something generic nations will struggle to match in monarchy or republic late game.

 

[fireandplague]

Yeah, depending on your campaign reform progress can be pretty fast. My current campaign I was hugboxed and had only one viable expansion route against a large tag, so my wars were every 15 years for the first 80 years of the playthrough. I'm playing with a monarchy and I wasn't sparing with estate privileges (average of 3.5 per estate), and yet I'm gaining 1.46 reform progress monthly, on track to get tier 10 in November 1609 at current rate.

 

[Manwe_Sulimo]

Many guides I've read say that you should really be aiming to get max absolutism up to 100 by the mid-to-late game. When the age of absolutism comes around, though, my max is usually more like zero because of all the estate decisions I've taken. Are you basically meant to just revoke all the estate decisions at that point? Although the loyalty equilibrium is a bit better at that point, I think it'll still be below 50% if I revoke everything, so:

a) what am I meant to do to get max absolutism to 100?
b) how do I do this whilst maintaining an estates loyalty equilibrium above 50%?

Generally you should already start taking away some privileges and increasing your crownland before 1600 to prepare for absolutism to come.

 

[Sherhi]

You should start revoking privileges few years before absolutism hits, how many years depends on how many privileges you have active ofc. Max absolutism is not really mandatory unless you go for heavy conquest late game (world conquest or you are far behind the main goal of your campaign).